Why does he even need a financial boost, can't he just go visit some band members of a couple of important extreme bands in the US and/or go on holiday to Europe to visit some shows there and so some spontaneous interviews.. Half of his footage is archive material anyway, maybe for the better, 'cause it's not like we need to see more video footage of him watching shows or anything... -_-

He'd have to pay for his travel, he has to pay his crew,and he has to pay to use archive material (unless it's material he actually owns).

I see Sam dunn around occasionally. He seems well versed enough on his metal. Its probably more that he is being told what to do his shows about. He should have stopped after Headbangers Journey, to be honest. Watching Dunn walk into a Mosque in Indonesia preaching about peace and love was pretty sickening to say the least. That being said, I have never even heard of this show. I'll have to take a gander or several.

Oh..

Quote:

Summary

Metal Evolution is broken down into episodes about a different piece of metal history. The series includes interviews with and about Alice Cooper, Slash, Lemmy, Rob Zombie, members of Megadeth, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Slayer, Judas Priest, Van Halen, Def Leppard, The Stooges, ZZ Top, Soundgarden, Mötley Crüe, Poison, Rage Against the Machine, Alice in Chains, Korn, Lamb of God and more.

Very exciting shit. I really hope the "and more" section can live up to the widely-acclaimed and enormously coveted reputations of such talented metal acts as Korn, Lamb of God, and Rage Against the Machine

Several edits on this post here..

I will not be checking this shit-show out. The episode breakdown looks absolutely repulsive, false, misleading and .. just plain awful. Episode titles: Glam, Thrash (big 4), Grunge, Nu-Metal, Shock Rock, Power Metal, Progressive Metal. I would have assumed he was doing it chronologically, if not for the inclusion of Nu metal right in the middle of the first season. Where is the fucking black metal, I ask? I must have missed that Korn album that came out before Under the Sign of the Black Mark.

Its a decent enough show but I will watch most metal related stuff. I don't expect it to spend time on underground black metal bands or stuff like that. It is VH-1 after all and that means sticking to the more mainstream stuff. The Power and Prog episodes didn't even get on TV in the US as far as I know.

The Power and Prog episodes didn't even get on TV in the US as far as I know.

They have shown them in the US and those were easily the worst episodes of the series that deal with actual metal. The power metal episode in particular was just hilarious.

That "power metal" episode of course included interviews with HammerFall and Kai Hansen and people like that but said absolutely nothing about USPM save for Manowar (but he didn't say where they were from!)Apparently power metal is *girlish* and built on *simple melodies* that anyone can easily join in and sing along to and that is its major distinctive feature.

The prog episode has Mastodon as the leading band of the whole "prog revival".Some guy from Classic Rock magazine is the only one who mentioned the word "sludge" in connection to the band, something Sam Dunn seemed totally oblivious to.

I haven't had the time to watch the whole thing and I doubt I will. It is misleading crap from a guy who should just hole up in his basement and explore more metal than he obviously listens to.

I was leary about this show from the start, mainly due to the fact that, even though VH1 Classic is a metal band's best friend on basic satellite TV these days, the only 'metal' it seems to know is late '80s glam.

The doc was OK. I was bummed that they didn't expand on thrash, power metal, and completely ignored doom metal (isn't that the most primordial metal genre to begin with?) while taking the time focusing on grunge, nu metal, and shock rock. BUT, this is about the evolution of metal, and I suppose: grunge, nu, and shock all had some value that forced some development unto the metal world; talking about doom would've been reiterating most of Classic UK/NWOBHM.

_________________You say "Justin Bieber", I say... OK. So?92% of teens have cleanly divided themselves according to genres. If you're part of the 8% that doesn't give a shit why others listen to their music, then I don't care. Just enjoy the damn music.

I don't see what grunge has to do with metal, and I thought it was pretty retarded they devoted an entire episode to grunge and even post-grunge. They even took the time to interview Nickelback and Creed. I thought it was pathetic.

I've seen the whole series now and I must say I enjoyed it thoroughly. Sometimes in the intended way, and sometimes in the 'bad movie' kind of way.

The grunge episode hilarious. It felt like Sam started with "I don't think grunge is metal, so here's 10 minutes of a bunch of people saying it isn't metal although some of them kind of like Black Sabbath a bit." <interviews> "But what I still don't understand is, what makes grunge metal?" I'm not sure what purpose was served by the Chad Kroeger interview, but he seemed very unapologetic and comfortable with Nickelback's status as a mainstream act earning bazillions of dollars. And why should he be otherwise?

Power metal was just cringe inducing in its presentation. I can't for the life of me work out why Sam portrayed it as something so utterly "mysterious" and "foreign" to him. I mean, he's an Iron Maiden fanboy and power metal is just traditional metal with certain elements emphasised (lyrical and visual themes, keyboards etc). What on earth is 'mysterious' about Hammerfall or Helloween to a trad metal fan? I also got some chuckles out of Joey DeMaio refusing an interview.

Shock rock I thought was genuinely good. He immediately faced up to the fact that he was discussing bands loosely associated by performance styles rather than actual musical commonality. It gave him scope to discuss some truly diverse acts from the 50s to the modern day. If that's what he had to do to squeeze Venom into the series, then I'm okay with it. I even liked the interview with Clown from SlipKnot. But does Sam interview Alice Cooper once a week or what?

Prog seemed to be the most 'on the mark' of the lot, provided you weren't expecting anything obscure. It's hard to go too far wrong drawing the line from 70s English prog rock (mentioning Yes every couple of minutes), fellating Rush, then through to Queensryche and Dream Theater. I remain to be convinced of how important Mastodon, DEP and Meshuggah really are, but I was pleasantly surprised he didn't spend the last 20 minutes on Opeth. And yes, Fates Warning could have done with some air time.

Overall I have to say I liked the glam episode most. I can't quite put my finger on it. Perhaps it most the most 'grounded' of the lot in that it showed the reality of the guys still making a living off it after their fifteen minutes of fame. I liked the pragmatism of them, especially Rikki Rockett. He seemed to be completely switched on to the fact that they're a nostalgia act earning money off old songs, and that that won't last forever. It's a surprising level of maturity from guys who were once reckless young rock stars without a care in the world.

Oh yes, and Sam has been hanging around on reddit a bit lately. He seems really keen to push this project for the 'extreme metal' episode. I'm still not convinced he understands that isn't one genre, though. Hell, he could do a lengthy series on black, death, doom, grindcore, industrial, maybe even folk. Oh well, let's see how it goes.

_________________

John_Sunlight wrote:

Gif logos are a rare and special thing. They should be reserved only for truly exceptional and rare and special and important bands, bands like Blind Guardian and... Blind Guardian. This should be in the rules.

I have started watching the episodes. He really does go back a bit into things doesn't he. I never thought MC5 and Iggy. let alone Ted Nugent would be legitimately related to heavy metal in any sense and yet here we are drwaing all manner of comparisons, tracing all kinds of lines. Will hang with it for a few, see how it all turns out.

I don't like extreme metal, it's defined by the harsh vocals, so I think it's fine to put those bands under a single label. That's how I see it at least.

Harsh vocals are a big addition, but you could make extreme metal without harsh vocals.

_________________

gomorro wrote:

Yesterday was the birthday of school pal and I met the chick of my sigh (I've talked about here before, the she-wolf I use to be inlove with)... Maaan she was using a mini-skirt too damn insane... Dude you could saw her entire soul every time she sit...

The purpose of genres is mostly to bicker and nitpick with hardcore fans who also find genres extremely important, as demonstrated in this very thread.

The funny thing is, the more these unique snowflakes find that genres serve a purpose, the more they have their own precise definitions of how to label bands and argue with the other asshole next to them who is also into wasting time figuring out where exactly this or that artist fits within those ridiculously narrow niches.

_________________

mjollnir wrote:

Noble Beast's debut album is way beyond MOST of what Priest did in the 80s.

No, it is an umbrella term and I, among others that understand the purpose of genres, care because it is extremely vague and causes confusion.

Were you "confused" by what he said? I understand that extreme metal is an umbrella term and not a genre all it's own, but bothering to correct such a small and meaningless mistake seems kind of ridiculous. I highly doubt that Asmodeus8797 meant that he thought extreme metal is it's own genre, and was just using the term in relation to the title of the episode.

No, it is an umbrella term and I, among others that understand the purpose of genres, care because it is extremely vague and causes confusion.

Were you "confused" by what he said? I understand that extreme metal is an umbrella term and not a genre all it's own, but bothering to correct such a small and meaningless mistake seems kind of ridiculous. I highly doubt that Asmodeus8797 meant that he thought extreme metal is it's own genre, and was just using the term in relation to the title of the episode.

No, it's just annoying and I see it too often to ignore it. Asmo said extreme metal was his favorite genre so I have no idea how you could interpret that any other way than extreme metal is a genre that he likes more than any other.

The purpose of genres is mostly to bicker and nitpick with hardcore fans who also find genres extremely important, as demonstrated in this very thread.

The funny thing is, the more these unique snowflakes find that genres serve a purpose, the more they have their own precise definitions of how to label bands and argue with the other asshole next to them who is also into wasting time figuring out where exactly this or that artist fits within those ridiculously narrow niches.

Genres are very useful in describing a band or bands to another person who hasn't heard that band(s). Genres also serve a big purpose when searching for more music in the same vein. Hardcore has little to do with describing the vast amount of metal styles. So, no, demonstrating metal's apparent superiority over hardcore is not even close to the main purpose of categorizing metal by genres.

enigmatech wrote:

Nhor wrote:

Extreme metal isn't a genre.

Apparently it is. Who cares? Seems like a stupid thing to worry about, honestly.

No one's worried about it, we're just pointing out that extreme metal isn't a genre and you've taking that out of context.

EmeraldEdge9832 wrote:

I don't like extreme metal, it's defined by the harsh vocals, so I think it's fine to put those bands under a single label. That's how I see it at least.

I can think of countless genres of metal with harsh vocals that are vastly different. Labeling them as one genre is entirely ignorant.

I can think of countless genres of metal with harsh vocals that are vastly different. Labeling them as one genre is entirely ignorant.

I didn't say label them as one genre (it would be sub-genre anyway, not genre), I said I have no problem using the umbrella term to place all bands with harsh vocals under it, since it distinguishes for me bands that I don't like from bands that I do like. I know that there are lots of different types of metal that have harsh vocals, but for me those vocals are very distinct and separate from other forms of metal.

Extreme metal (and again, this is just how I see it) is death metal, black metal, grindcore, as well as bands in different styles that use harsh vocals (such as lamb of god, machine head, etc.).

Metal is certainly a genre of music, and within it are several main sub-genres. Again, extreme metal is not a sub-genre, but a somewhat inaccurate umbrella term for many different types of sub-genres of metal. I personally don't care if it's used in such a way. And so I agree with those who say it's not a sub-genre, but I'm not angered or upset by its usage either, simply because extreme metal bands are not my thing.

I have completely missed this show. I was not aware it even existed. I might have to check it out just for my own morbid curiosity. I did actually like A Headbanger's Journey, not to say I did not have any problems with it.

The purpose of genres is mostly to bicker and nitpick with hardcore fans who also find genres extremely important, as demonstrated in this very thread.

The funny thing is, the more these unique snowflakes find that genres serve a purpose, the more they have their own precise definitions of how to label bands and argue with the other asshole next to them who is also into wasting time figuring out where exactly this or that artist fits within those ridiculously narrow niches.

How new are you to music? If you seriously have overlooked the fact that the reason for labeling anything is to separate x from y then you have no business discussing the matter in the first place.

Yes, because "mallcore teens" really care about the extensive interviews done with Diamond Head, King Crimson, Alice Cooper and so on. The thrash episode doesn't even mention Lamb of God until nearer the end.

@Riffs: subgenres and tags are necessary and used for everyone when it comes to briefly describes what a band plays, to make recommendations... in short, to talk about a certain group of bands that happens to feature stylistic similarities.

People saying ' I listen music, not genres' is full of bullshit and it's a lie.

Btw, Dunn also said his fav 'genre' was extreme metal. The guy just happen to know a bunch of bands, but I doubt he has a real deeper understanding of the subgenres.

"People saying ' I listen music, not genres' is full of bullshit and it's a lie."I agree. They just say that because because they don't yet know how to identify genres. They'll often say something like, "What genre is this band, you can't tell me!!" And within seconds I'm able to tell them the exact genre.

And I meet people who say stuff like "There's way too many sub-genres of metal! They take it too seriously! Like, what's the difference between thrash metal and death metal?" And I say to them, you mean to tell me you can't hear a difference in style between Metallica and Cannibal Corpse?